Cal-Cut Pipe & Supply, Inc. v. Haradine Petroleum, Inc.

Good Law
110 Cal. Rptr. 666·1973 Cal. App. LEXIS 717·35 Cal. App. 3d 359·46 Oil & Gas Rep. 299
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 16, 1973Civ. No. 31334California5,410 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Rattigan, J.

This appeal involves questions of fact and law arising under the Oil and Gas Lien Act, to which we hereinafter refer as the “Act.” (Code Civ. Proc., pt. 3, tit. 4, ch. 2.5 [commencing with § 1203.50].) As the Act has not been cited in a reported appellate decision since its enactment in 1959 (Stats. 1959, ch. 2020, § 1, p. 4660 et seq.), some of the issues presented are apparently matters of first impression.

The appeal is from a single judgment entered in two substantially identical actions which were consolidated for trial. Plaintiff Cal-Cut Pipe & Supply, Inc., is a corporation engaged in the oil field supply business; plaintiff Bakersfield Drilling Company, Inc., is an oil-drilling contractor. Each of them commenced an action against “Joe Cannon dba Joe Cannon, *362 Operator,” 1 Haradine Petroleum, Inc. (a corporation, hereinafter “Haradine”), William P. Steitz, and others, seeking to foreclose a lien claimed pursuant to the Act. After a nonjury trial of the consolidated actions, the trial court filed findings of fact and conclusions of law in plaintiffs’ favor and entered judgment sustaining and foreclosing the claimed liens accordingly. Defendants Haradine and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.